Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-03-10
ARGUING ALLEN.
ppyrAroRY POINT IN TIE Bx.AUDI.
TORS cAsEIN THE SUPREME COURT.
Hr. PeudIston as the Representative OF
the Attorney. General In Com
monwealth's Cases.

S. Brown Allen, Esq, late Auditor OF
Public Accounts, is appealing to the
Supreme Court of Virginia from a
Judgment of the Circuit Court OF Rich
mond.
The latter court found, upon the trial
of a suit brought against Allen by the
Commonwealth, that he had, without
warrant of law, paid certain moneys to
Mr.. Hamilton, at that time treasurer OF
Augusta. So he asks that Judge Well
ford's decree be reversed and annulled,
and day before yesterday his counsel,
Judge Hugh w. Sheffey, appeared TO
argue the cause. The Puryear case
was then under consideration by the
Supreme Court, and Mr.. Edmund Pen
dleton was acting in the place of Attor-
ney-General Ayers. Mr.. Pendleton
having opportunity so to do, moved the
court for postponement OF the Allen
case, stating that Mr.. Ayers was In at
tendance upon the Supreme Court of
the United States at Washington to ar
guc on behalf Of the State of Virginia
the Fitzgerald and other habeas-cor-
pus cases. Judge Sheifey objected to
any delay, and the Court declined to
make the order asked.
Yesterday morning Mr.. Pendleton re-
newed his motion and stated the cause
of Mr.. Ayers sabsence and other reasons
o1, - IN
dulged.
Judge Sheffey still objected to q
continuance, but said that if the motion
was to be granted by the Court he
claimed the right to have day fixed
that would be convenient to him. His
engagements were such that March 26th
was the only day that would suit him.
While his request and desire was that
the case should be now heard, if posi-
bic, if there was to be delay he hoped
the Court would fix the Goth.
CONTINUED.
Judge Lacy, acting president of the
Court, then took the vote of the judges.
Judge Fauntleroy said that as the
Commonwealth had just been repre-
sented by Mr.. Pendleton in the Pur-
year case, he could not see any sound
reason for a continuance of this ALLEN
case on account of the absence of the
Acknowledgement. The one (Puryear)
case involved a question Of life and
death and supremacy of the law the
other was only a matter of dollars and
cents. If Mr.. Pendleton could appear
for the State in one, why not i'll the
other ?
Jndge Hinton limited at doubts thai
might possibly be entertained of th
Commonwealth being represented by
any other than the Attorney-General.
Judge Richardson favored the con.
tinuance. and Judge Lacy announc ad
that the case was continued until t1C
2Gth.
THE ATTOREEY-GENEBAL.
As was stated in Mr.. Pendleton s re-
marks, he was requested by the Attor
ney-General to prepare himself to argu.
the Puryear case, and he did so. WheI
that case was called he was ready tC
proceed. He had made no preparation
for the Allen case at all, and Mr.. Aver:
did not expect that it would be called
for trial before his return from Wash
ineton.
The position that Mr. Pendleton
holds is clerk to the Attorney-General,
but he is a practicing attorney, and in
the multitudinous cases in the hands OF
that officer often appears for him, and
is really his assistant. 1t was impera-
tive that the Attorney-General should
be represented by him in the PuryeaI
case, or the case would have been con-
tinued, as Mr.. Ayers could not be i'll
Washington and Richmond, too.
MIR. Pendleton appeared in the Pur-
year case, with ex-Judge r. II. Jones,
of Dinwiddie, who was of counsel fol-
the prosecution, in the trial court.
1T is quite the custom for counsel
who appeared for the Commonwealth
in the lower court to assist the Attor-
ney-Genernl in the Supreme Court. No
objection was heard from the counsel
of Puryear to the appearance of Mr..
Pendleton for the Acknowledgement.
Still, in case Of an adverse decision for
Puryear, it is very probable that this
question as to whether any other than
the Attorney-General can appear for
the Commonwealth will be raised 1t
might be done on a motion for re-
hearing.